So I swung out to Bruce's last night and he hauled out two more FIW games he had laying around. We played Wilderness Empires (a "new" game by Worthington Games) a few weeks ago and we wanted to compare. First up was The Struggle for New France.
As we were going though the rules, I kept thinking "this is really similar to Wilderness Empires". But we wrote that off as "same war, same level of abstraction, likely similar feel". Then we started playing and damned if it wasn't exactly the same game excepting a slightly different (and better) combat mechanism and different way of tracking troop strength.
As we played, we speculated about a design duo break-up and maybe duelling products. In the end, the British won, sacking Louisburg and holding off a rampaging Montcalm.
So I get home and look and the same guy designed both games. Worthington games just re-treated Struggle for New France (2013) as Wilderness Wars (2015) at twice the price. I guess it was a case of buyer beware on the kickstarter of Wilderness Wars (although this was never mentioned to my recollection and isn't at all clear on the Worthington website) but I cant help but feel like I got screwed. Last Worthington Games purchase for me!
Then Bruce hauled out Wolfe and Montcalm which was a campaign engine in his Habitants and Highlanders rules. We played a quick game--not completely to conclusion but far enough to see the British had it after driving up Lake Champlain.
Up next: Some HO-scale buildings and a 1/-72-scale Grant are underway.
I have read your comment here and your review on BGG. And I can understand why you are upset. I will too. But as i have any of the two games, generally speaching do you recommend wilderness empires ? Is it fun to play? Even if i am italian this is a war me and my game's partner ever enjoied playing. Wilderness war is one of our prefered game. And we are fond also in block games. Do you think WE worth a try?
ReplyDeleteThanks for your opinion
Giuseppe Gessa
ggessa72 on BGG